These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Why can't bounties be cut in all the server to help with inflation?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#41 - 2012-11-13 15:58:24 UTC
Typhis Deterious wrote:
Before there was salvaging there was only rat bounties, loot, and mission rewards. this was before 2008. Many folks started out making not much money that way and are set in their ways. I used to chain belt rats in null to get an officer spawn (which was once in a blue moon). But when they DID spawn and dropped a great module I could sell that and make more that a mission runner at the time ever could off of the nullsec bounties alone


Officer & faction spawn rates have taken a few nerfs in the last two years, as has nullsec ratting in general. Officers also are no longer soloable in your BC or battleship.

This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee, Grammar Gestapo & #1 Official Gevlon Goblin Fanclub member.
LHA Tarawa
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#42 - 2012-11-13 16:02:05 UTC
Terrorfrodo wrote:
I don't see a lot of inflation except in PLEX prices. Which I don't care about.


Really? Because mineral prices have just about doubled in the last year, along with the price of tech 1 ships and equipment.

If you fly mostly T2/T3 and faction (even meta 4), then yeah, not much inflation. Prices based on mineral costs... way up.

Again, this demonstrates that the inflation is being pushed by the removal of mineral generating drone drop and rat dropping meta 0.

This shows that this is not systemic spiral inflation with no end in sight, but rather temporary inflation as mining profitability adjusts from its deflated state (caused by alternate means of mineral injection) to match that of mission running.

Typhis Deterious
NO D1C3
#43 - 2012-11-13 16:05:19 UTC
Mallak Azaria wrote:
Typhis Deterious wrote:
Before there was salvaging there was only rat bounties, loot, and mission rewards. this was before 2008. Many folks started out making not much money that way and are set in their ways. I used to chain belt rats in null to get an officer spawn (which was once in a blue moon). But when they DID spawn and dropped a great module I could sell that and make more that a mission runner at the time ever could off of the nullsec bounties alone


Officer & faction spawn rates have taken a few nerfs in the last two years, as has nullsec ratting in general. Officers also are no longer soloable in your BC or battleship.

I haven't done officers in about 3 years. Since they put in exploration I have been running wormhole sites and anomalies. Not to mention I do some planetary interaction to supplement my income. Every 3 months I do my Epic mission Arc for a good 200+ million in bounties, rewards, and loot. I don't make tons of money like I did years ago, but I make enough to buy my pew pew ships and my site runners.
Ager Agemo
Rainbow Ponies Incorporated
#44 - 2012-11-13 16:05:59 UTC
LHA Tarawa wrote:
Terrorfrodo wrote:
I don't see a lot of inflation except in PLEX prices. Which I don't care about.


Really? Because mineral prices have just about doubled in the last year, along with the price of tech 1 ships and equipment.

If you fly mostly T2/T3 and faction (even meta 4), then yeah, not much inflation. Prices based on mineral costs... way up.

Again, this demonstrates that the inflation is being pushed by the removal of mineral generating drone drop and rat dropping meta 0.

This shows that this is not systemic spiral inflation with no end in sight, but rather temporary inflation as mining profitability adjusts from its deflated state (caused by alternate means of mineral injection) to match that of mission running.




however i believe as the prices increases in order to match them mission running and anomalies will increase in activity and thus increase teh ammount of isk avaible and encourage further mineral grown, the tipping point being when players just cannot run anymore missions or anomalies out of sheer exhaustion.
Terrorfrodo
Interbus Universal
#45 - 2012-11-13 16:09:22 UTC
Ok yes, there is some inflation. But I don't consider it 'natural' inflation because it was either caused by deliberate changes in game design or by deliberate player actions to raise prices.

The mineral prices went up because CCP changed loot drops. T2 prices went up because of OTEC. Some fuel prices went up because of the Goon ice interdiction. Goons also affected mineral prices with Hulkageddon.

But all those factors are intended effects of either CCP or player groups, so they are not a catastrophe that needs fixing, like runaway inflation in a real economy.

Besides, prices have fallen a lot from where they were at the height of speculation...

.
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#46 - 2012-11-13 16:12:08 UTC
Typhis Deterious wrote:
Mallak Azaria wrote:
Typhis Deterious wrote:
Before there was salvaging there was only rat bounties, loot, and mission rewards. this was before 2008. Many folks started out making not much money that way and are set in their ways. I used to chain belt rats in null to get an officer spawn (which was once in a blue moon). But when they DID spawn and dropped a great module I could sell that and make more that a mission runner at the time ever could off of the nullsec bounties alone


Officer & faction spawn rates have taken a few nerfs in the last two years, as has nullsec ratting in general. Officers also are no longer soloable in your BC or battleship.

I haven't done officers in about 3 years. Since they put in exploration I have been running wormhole sites and anomalies. Not to mention I do some planetary interaction to supplement my income. Every 3 months I do my Epic mission Arc for a good 200+ million in bounties, rewards, and loot. I don't make tons of money like I did years ago, but I make enough to buy my pew pew ships and my site runners.


It's been about 18 months since I slaved for my isk. Now I have other people do that for me before I take it all.

This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee, Grammar Gestapo & #1 Official Gevlon Goblin Fanclub member.
EI Digin
irc.zulusquad.org
#47 - 2012-11-13 16:14:26 UTC  |  Edited by: EI Digin
There is a misconception that many people have in this thread. Inflation is not per item or item bracket based. Inflation is an increase in the money supply causing all items to increase in price.

PLEX are going up in price mostly because of supply/demand, a little bit from inflation over the years, and a lot from manipulation. Mineral prices also are not related, they have increased because of drone nerfs and the price upticks are unrelated to inflation as a whole.

A bounty nerf would effect inflation because bounties create isk out of nowhere, directly effecting the money supply.
LHA Tarawa
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#48 - 2012-11-13 16:19:08 UTC
Ager Agemo wrote:
LHA Tarawa wrote:
Terrorfrodo wrote:
I don't see a lot of inflation except in PLEX prices. Which I don't care about.


Really? Because mineral prices have just about doubled in the last year, along with the price of tech 1 ships and equipment.

If you fly mostly T2/T3 and faction (even meta 4), then yeah, not much inflation. Prices based on mineral costs... way up.

Again, this demonstrates that the inflation is being pushed by the removal of mineral generating drone drop and rat dropping meta 0.

This shows that this is not systemic spiral inflation with no end in sight, but rather temporary inflation as mining profitability adjusts from its deflated state (caused by alternate means of mineral injection) to match that of mission running.




however i believe as the prices increases in order to match them mission running and anomalies will increase in activity and thus increase teh ammount of isk avaible and encourage further mineral grown, the tipping point being when players just cannot run anymore missions or anomalies out of sheer exhaustion.


You miss the point. Once you can make more mining, people won't run more missions to make more ISK. They will go mining to make more ISK.

Mining is adjusting up in profitability to the level of mission running. Once they reach equilibrium, a TON of mission runners will go mining instead.


Or, looking at it another way... Drone goo and loot drops were injecting so many minerals that mining profitability was depressed. The non-mining mineral injection has been drastically reduced, so mineral prices are adjusting to the point that mining is as profitable as mission running.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#49 - 2012-11-13 16:22:50 UTC
Typhis Deterious wrote:


What i don't understand is the animosity toward those players who do not want to venture into nullsec and would rather mission in high sec.


Can't understand or won't understand?

We are talking fundamental game balance. There is supposed to be a "natural" progression in the game, with more safety equating to substantially less reward and less (or no) safety equating to riches.

But it no longer works that way, now (when it comes to shooting rats for isk) you can practically make the same in high sec as you can in null sec. Officer and Faction spawns are so rare as to be irrelevant, and the advantage of high isk bounties on rats in null is wiped out by the fact that you can farm lower bounty rats COMPLETELY UNINTERRUPTED in high sec.

The end result is that people who would be populating null sec (thus providing pvp targets, and it's those targets exploding that fuels the entire EVE market) are, like me, using alts in high sec to make isk in safety, which rocks for me personally but just isn't good for the game as a whole.

I'm mostly a pve player, I could hardly look down on mission and incursion runners since I am one, but just because something is good for me doesn't mean it's good for the community. Some people are to enslaved by their narrow interests to see the big picture.
LHA Tarawa
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#50 - 2012-11-13 16:28:48 UTC
EI Digin wrote:
There is a misconception that many people have in this thread. Inflation is not per item or item bracket based. Inflation is an increase in the money supply causing all items to increase or decrease in price.

PLEX are going up in price mostly because of supply/demand, a little bit from inflation over the years, and a lot from manipulation. Mineral prices also are not related, they have increased because of drone nerfs and the price upticks are unrelated to inflation as a whole.

A bounty nerf would effect inflation because bounties create isk out of nowhere, directly effecting the money supply.



We have this same argument real world, all the time, and it shows a 1 dimensional understanding of economics.

Inflation is NOT caused by an increase in the total money supply, but rather ONLY by the portion of the money supply that is actively chasing goods and services.


In EVE, 100 trillion ISK sitting in the wallets of a few ubber rich T2 moon goo controlling, mega coalitions does not cause inflation. It is only of those with the ISK all try to spend it faster than goods and services can be produced that it would cause inflation.

Real World. The USA money supply has increased from $4T to $38T over the last 30 years. That 9.5x increase in money supply has resulted in only a 2x increase in prices. Why? Tax code changes that have made it easier for a small % of the population to accumulate a massive portion of the money supply have resulted in the vast majority of the new money creation not being actively used to chase goods and services.

i.e: Inflation is caused by too much money chasing too few goods and services. Money that is not chasing goods and services does not cause inflation in EVE or real life. There are two solutions to inflation... reduce the amount of money chasing goods and services or increase the amount of goods and services being produced for the money to chase.

When mining reaches the profitability level of mission running (anom running), there will be a natural shift from bounty injection to mineral production, stopping inflation in its tracks.
LHA Tarawa
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#51 - 2012-11-13 16:38:02 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:

We are talking fundamental game balance. There is supposed to be a "natural" progression in the game, with more safety equating to substantially less reward and less (or no) safety equating to riches.


And then players went and made 0.0 as safe as high sec, and the progression went away.

Jenn aSide wrote:

The end result is that people who would be populating null sec (thus providing pvp targets, and it's those targets exploding that fuels the entire EVE market) are, like me, using alts in high sec to make isk in safety, which rocks for me personally but just isn't good for the game as a whole.


Says who?

People that want to PVP can. People that do not want to PVP have a place where they can pretty much avoid it. The total number of players is increased, increasing CCP's profitability and giving them more money to reinvest in game development.

Attempt to force people to PVP, you push those that do not want to PVP out of the game. Now the only people playing the game are those that want to PVP.... the people that were already PVPing.... There are no more "targets", just fewer people playing the game and less money for game development.


PVPers need to rid themselves of this notion that if they could just nerf high sec, then there would be more easy targets out in low/null. This could not be more wrong! People are not going to play a game were they are nothing more than easy targets for PVPers.
Some Rando
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#52 - 2012-11-13 16:40:11 UTC
LHA Tarawa wrote:
PVPers need to rid themselves of this notion that if they could just nerf high sec, then there would be more easy targets out in low/null. This could not be more wrong! People are not going to play a game were they are nothing more than easy targets for PVPers.

Don't be an easy target. vOv

CCP has no sense of humour.
Vincent Athena
Photosynth
#53 - 2012-11-13 16:46:29 UTC
Some Rando wrote:
Rengerel en Distel wrote:
Pretty sure the last word from CCP was that we were in a deflationary period.

Really need a link to that quote.

Its in the last set of CSM minutes.

But lets look at actual prices

Item 6 months ago Now
oxygen isotopes 1000 550
Tritanium 6.16 6.23
Raven 144 mil 155 mil
Nemesis 29 mil 22 mil
Mackinaw 160 mil 160 mil
425mm railgun II 5 mil 5.2 mil
Caldari POS 240 mil 290 mil

From the looks of it some thing shave gone up, others down. Anything made from mined minerals has tended to go up. But my guess is that is due to the loss of "mining with guns". That is loss of drone droppings and meta zero module drops.

Now CCP can do this analysis much better than me. So if they see an excess ISK issue, they will do something. At present they do not seem to be saying there is an issue, so my guess it its not an issue.

Know a Frozen fan? Check this out

Frozen fanfiction
LHA Tarawa
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#54 - 2012-11-13 16:46:31 UTC
Some Rando wrote:
LHA Tarawa wrote:
PVPers need to rid themselves of this notion that if they could just nerf high sec, then there would be more easy targets out in low/null. This could not be more wrong! People are not going to play a game were they are nothing more than easy targets for PVPers.

Don't be an easy target. vOv



There are already a ton of NON-easy targets in null. Which is why the PVPers are screaming for the removal of local, in hopes of making more easy targets.

The PVPers want easy targets and are demanding changes in the game that they think will create more easy targets. They are wrong. People will not play a game where they are little more than easy targets for PVPers to kill. Attempt to make more easy targets, you simply get fewer players.
Some Rando
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#55 - 2012-11-13 16:49:35 UTC
LHA Tarawa wrote:
The PVPers want easy targets and are demanding changes in the game that they think will create more easy targets. They are wrong. People will not play a game where they are little more than easy targets for PVPers to kill. Attempt to make more easy targets, you simply get fewer players.

Don't be an easy target. vOv

Also, Dinsdale alt detected.

CCP has no sense of humour.
Vincent Athena
Photosynth
#56 - 2012-11-13 16:51:53 UTC
Some Rando wrote:
LHA Tarawa wrote:
The PVPers want easy targets and are demanding changes in the game that they think will create more easy targets. They are wrong. People will not play a game where they are little more than easy targets for PVPers to kill. Attempt to make more easy targets, you simply get fewer players.

Don't be an easy target. vOv

Also, Dinsdale alt detected.

The easiest way to not be an easy target is to play a different game. Then you do not have a target at all.

Know a Frozen fan? Check this out

Frozen fanfiction
Some Rando
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#57 - 2012-11-13 16:54:55 UTC
Vincent Athena wrote:
The easiest way to not be an easy target is to play a different game. Then you do not have a target at all.

Play a different game then, just don't **** up EVE.

CCP has no sense of humour.
LHA Tarawa
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#58 - 2012-11-13 16:56:34 UTC
Vincent Athena wrote:
Some Rando wrote:
LHA Tarawa wrote:
The PVPers want easy targets and are demanding changes in the game that they think will create more easy targets. They are wrong. People will not play a game where they are little more than easy targets for PVPers to kill. Attempt to make more easy targets, you simply get fewer players.

Don't be an easy target. vOv

Also, Dinsdale alt detected.

The easiest way to not be an easy target is to play a different game. Then you do not have a target at all.



Correct. Which is the option that the carebears will take if the PVPers force game changes that they think will make carebears easy targets.

I do not understand how people do not get this.
LHA Tarawa
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#59 - 2012-11-13 16:58:39 UTC
Some Rando wrote:
Vincent Athena wrote:
The easiest way to not be an easy target is to play a different game. Then you do not have a target at all.

Play a different game then, just don't **** up EVE.


CCP is going to make whatever changes are needed to increase the number of paid accounts. Shake your fists at the sky all you want. Use language that gets censored out in an attempt to ignore that reality. It is all moot.
Some Rando
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#60 - 2012-11-13 17:04:06 UTC
LHA Tarawa wrote:
CCP is going to make whatever changes are needed to increase the number of paid accounts.

That's interesting, I recall a CCP employee specifically stating that we were at a point where we could lose certain people.

CCP has no sense of humour.